Examples Of Compromises After The Civil War

of those of other descriptions on the 1st. year after this Government shall have been adopted and every year thereafter…”(Document 6). When it came to the issue of slavery, the southern and northern states broke into a bitter argument on whether slaves should be included into the state’s population or not. Southern states wanted to include slaves because the majority of their population were made up of slaves, but northern states feared that by allowing southern states to do so they might loose control of the House of Representatives. Unmoral as it may be, the 3/5th compromise eased the conflict between the Northern and Southern states.

During the early years of America, agricultural demands drove most of the economy allowing the South to demanded political protection. One of the protective measures was the Three-Fifths Compromise in 1787. The South wanted to count the slaves toward its population allowing for more representation. At the Constitutional Convention, the delegates decided to count a slave as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of determining the population for how many seats each State would have in the House. This solidified Southern control over Politics for several years to come.

In an attempt to address concerns dealing with representation of the states in Congress, delegates chosen from the states: Massachusetts, New York, Maryland, Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Virginia, Connecticut, and Georgia met in Philadelphia on July 16, 1787 in a meeting called, The Constitutional Convention. Among these delegates was Roger Sherman of Connecticut. Sherman was seen as awkward and unmeaning, giving off the air of a sub-conscious farmer when seated quietly. Although Sherman’s posture and physical appearance was not up to par of other politicians, and gave insight on his background as a Yeoman farmer, his superior intelligence was often recognized and spoken about on a grand level by those

The 3/5ths compromise The smaller states wanted more representation in the house but the north argued that if blacks weren 't allowed to vote and didn 't have rights they shouldn 't be counted towards house seats. The compromise stated that every slave counted as 3/5ths of a person towards house

The conflict over slavery became more brutal as the United States expanded westward. It began to force Americans to either identify themselves as anti-slavery or pro-slavery. The discovery of new states led to the conflict on whether they should be admitted as free states or slaves states. Compromises, such as the Missouri Compromise of 1820 were attempted to settle the conflict of free states or slave states. The Missouri Compromise declared that all new states above the line would be establish as free states, and all states below the line would be establish as slave states.

The Three-Fifths Compromise is between the North and the South. The issue they were arguing over is whether a slave should be counted as a part of the state’s population, which determines how many representatives the state can select. The North had a population mostly that was comprise of white man. They believed that slaves shouldn’t be counted as a person since they were not citizens and didn’t have the rights to vote. However, the South disagreed because the majority of their population was slaves.

In return, the free states argued that if slaves are considered property, then they should not be counted for in a state’s population and if they are accounted for then they are considered individuals, not property. Upon hearing this, slave states said they would not approve the ratification of the Constitution unless their slaves were counted for in the House of Representatives. A compromise was then made, and it was called the 3/5 Compromise. As a result, only 3/5 of the slave population in these slaves' states were counted for in

They also “included the three-fifths clause which states that in deciding how many representatives a state could send to the house of representatives, the number would be determined by counting free persons, servants, in three-fifths of all other persons { slaves }. Congress was to use the same count for collecting taxes from the states”. Indians were excluded. Finally the framers agreed to include the fugitive slave clause which states that persons who escape from slavery to a state where slavery was prohibited “ shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labour may be due”. The compromise on slavery was designed to satisfy the demands of some of the southern states these states would not have supported the constitution without this agreement.

The 3/5 compromise is stating that slaves are only counted as 3/5 of a person on a census as id believe is so wrong and demeaning to do that just because of a different skin color or religion and culture. Back in those days the colonist or most of them thought that white Christians were superior to all other cultures and religions, so when it came to making a census and whether or not slaves should be counted or not they just thought hey! Even though there is a whole person standing in front of me I’m just going to count them as 3/5 just because they work for me and there are my property and aren’t like me. There are so many reason as too why this is wrong but first I’m going to say that nowhere in the bible does god ever say either that

One of the compromises made in the Constitutional Convention is the three-fifths compromise. In this compromise, the southerners wanted to add slaves to the population of the state they lived in. If slaves were included in their state’s population, that state would be able to add more representatives in the House of Representatives. Northerners did not agree with that statement because slaves did not have the right to vote. After the delegates compromised, they agreed that only three-fifths of the slave’s population would be counted into the state’s population.

At this time, slaves were not counted as anything for taxes or population. The South proposes that their slaves should be counted as part of their total population. Northerners object to this, obviously, because they wanted to continue having more representation and voice than the South. The Constitutional Convention decided upon the Three-Fifths Compromise. This compromise stated that every five slaves would count for three people.

Several compromises were made over the issue of slavery between the Three-Fifths Compromise in the Constitution and the Civil War. Most of these compromises were made in the hope of avoiding a civil war between the North and the South, but they just prolonged the inevitable battle. The Missouri Compromise was one of the first federal laws that focused solely on slavery, including the balance of slave and free states in the federal government. When Missouri applied for statehood in 1817, there was a balance in the Senate of 11 slave states and 11 free states. Debate broke out in Congress, owing to the fact that if Missouri was added as a free state or slave state, it would tip the balance towards that side with two more votes in the Senate.

Eventually, the delegates compromised on the slavery issue as well. Slaves were declared to count as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of population counts. However, neither the word slavery nor slave was used in the Constitution. Rather, it refers to the Three-Fifths Compromise as applying to “all other persons. ”Still, it was apparent whom the Three-Fifths Compromise targeted, since it went a step further and addressed the issue of the African slave trade.

However, the Missouri Compromise caused some problems. The compromise equaled the concerns and interests in the North and South, but the South was upset about how Congress gave itself the power to create and pass laws dealing with slavery. Much of the North was upset because Congress let slavery spread into another state. There were people who didn’t want to compromise, and others who did, such as Henry Clay.

However, these differences show that the North and South were actually two distinct countries held together by one constitution. The North felt that decisions regarding slavery and its legality were entrenched in the central government while the South felt that such decision belonged to the individual states. In the times preceding the war, both sides could not reach a compromise. Bonner mentions, “Because secession and war were permitted to come, warned Russel, "We are not entitled to lay the flattering unction to our souls that the Civil War was an inevitable conflict (Bonner, 195).” Hence, these differences could only be addressed through war.